BBKL GM Vote (Yes or No): Adding PPTOI from 2014/2015

[CAM]

I think we undervalue goalies. They are on the ice the entire game. Pretty important position. I know i would hate having 8 mil tied up in only 3 stat cats.

[The BBKL Insider]

I think we undervalue goalies. They are on the ice the entire game. Pretty important position. I know i would hate having 8 mil tied up in only 3 stat cats.

get with the program old man

a lot of us are now on board to replace GWG instead of SO with PPTIO

Shoalzie made a good argument

[shooker]

I think we undervalue goalies. They are on the ice the entire game. Pretty important position. I know i would hate having 8 mil tied up in only 3 stat cats.

If you hate having 8M tied up in 3 stats, trade me rask. I'd take him or Lundy at any price tag.

[Nick]

I can live with new categories being added but why remove another stat as a result? If the option was to just add this stat, I'd be open to it but why do we need to remove a category?

One could argue shutouts is somewhat redundant considering we have GAA and SV% that reflects the results of a shutout. So why have GWG? Goals and assists are basic stats but then we have parsed out of that the point stat, which is redundant...plus, we have ST points, which is redundant in the same way shutouts could be redundant for goalies. If the argument of using PPTOI as a way to counter SHTOI, I can understand...but don't eliminate shutouts. If you eliminate a stat to make room, I'd say lose GWG.

valid argument. where were you during this discussion in the suter thread? we could have used some level minded thinkers in there. I would be opposed to losing that stat either but think if you make the argument to keep SO, you have also made it for GWG. It's funny that we have never even discussed adding a stat, only swapping one out.

I mentioned it a while ago..

shows how many of my posts were actually being read...

[Nick]

random is weak chuck

pptoi gives you something to build towards IMO, another creative stat for a GM to plan his/her week around.

pptoi isn't an outcome though. GWG and SO are both the successful results of what a player does. Being on a PP that doesn't score is actually better for PPTOI...

whereas being on a PK that doesn't get scored on increases SHTOI (this is a success).

[kyuss]

disclaimer: i read nothing of the Suter thread.

Now, this would be enough for me to dislike the change:
"GMs have built teams around the current scoring system and this would skew certain players values"
(even if the 1 year delay to implement the change would help for that matter).

And that is coming from someone whose team is lacking in peripheries and good on offense instead.

Also, i never liked the PPTOI stat per se (even worse if G's toi would count as it happens for shtoi).

Btw, i guess someone already mentioned PPP matters more than SHP in our system, as for the PPTOI-SHTOI argument.

Btw #2, this argument seems to be contingent with the cap contraction.. and the season when the change would apply the cap will rise back instead, and grow even further in the future.


On a side note, i see zero reasons to remove the SO stat.

The GWG stat, albeit aleatory on the single week, rewards offense and moreover adds fun and some needed unpredictability to matchups. It also makes blowout games somewhat interesting till the end cause the GWG scorer may always change.

[kyuss]

GWG and SO are both the successful results of what a player does. Being on a PP that doesn't score is actually better for PPTOI...

whereas being on a PK that doesn't get scored on increases SHTOI (this is a success).

nice point.

[shooker]

random is weak chuck

pptoi gives you something to build towards IMO, another creative stat for a GM to plan his/her week around.

pptoi isn't an outcome though. GWG and SO are both the successful results of what a player does. Being on a PP that doesn't score is actually better for PPTOI...

whereas being on a PK that doesn't get scored on increases SHTOI (this is a success).

we discussed that before as well. It isn't a perfect stat but it does help. The fact is the top players on each team will be on for more power play minutes that don't work then players who aren't top players. It is more a stat to show elite offensive status then anything else. I hear the argument though. I mentioned it as well, but now feel the pro's outweigh the cons. It's measuring ability more then outcome, I am ok with that.

[shooker]

disclaimer: i read nothing of the Suter thread.

Now, this would be enough for me to dislike the change:
"GMs have built teams around the current scoring system and this would skew certain players values"
(even if the 1 year delay to implement the change would help for that matter).

And that is coming from someone whose team is lacking in peripheries and good on offense instead.

Also, i never liked the PPTOI stat per se (even worse if G's toi would count as it happens for shtoi).

Btw, i guess someone already mentioned PPP matters more than SHP in our system, as for the PPTOI-SHTOI argument.

Btw #2, this argument seems to be contingent with the cap contraction.. and the season when the change would apply the cap will rise back instead, and grow even further in the future.


On a side note, i see zero reasons to remove the SO stat.

The GWG stat, albeit aleatory on the single week, rewards offense and moreover adds fun and some needed unpredictability to matchups. It also makes blowout games somewhat interesting till the end cause the GWG scorer may always change.

curious what you mean here. Both PP points and SH points are measure in special team points, they are valued the same. just curious if I read wrong or what you meant by it.

I don't feel this argument has anything to do with cap contraction. I would have raised this argument even if the cap was at 74M this season. This argument is all about adding worth to dominant nhlers who currently aren't effective in bbkl. At least it was for me when I started that suter thread.

[kyuss]

curious what you mean here. Both PP points and SH points are measure in special team points, they are valued the same. just curious if I read wrong or what you meant by it.

SPTPP stat winner is usually determined by PPP, not by SHP.
Put it this way: it's a stat regularly won by bbkl teams who have strong PP specialists, not by teams who have guys who record some odd SHP.

[Nick]

Ye, we undervalue SHpts, because we count them the same as ppPoints, despite being a much rarer (and more impactful) occurance. However we justified that decision to lump them together, by counting shtoi.

[shooker]

curious what you mean here. Both PP points and SH points are measure in special team points, they are valued the same. just curious if I read wrong or what you meant by it.

SPTPP stat winner is usually determined by PPP, not by SHP.
Put it this way: it's a stat regularly won by bbkl teams who have strong PP specialists, not by teams who have guys who record some odd SHP.

gotcha. That makes sense. I originally wanted SHP but feel it is just another GWG or SO. As in uncommon stat.

[Nick]

Ye, there is a chance for a single short handed point to win a week, and that is out of proportion with it's in game impact. Just not a common enough measure to have it's own category.


Although the rareness and randomness is desirable in hindsight, especially combined with the actual ability for SHG to swing games. And there are actually a few players who get more SHG than others, Richards is consistently, year in and year out, near the top of the SHG list, ditto or J.Staal. Not that I would support building a stat for 2 players.

[shooker]

yea and we already have two random ass stats. although you could argue some players are better on a year to year basis at gwg and I don't think anyone would argue SO, so yea they are random week to week, but you can sort of plan for that over a year. I am stretching the sort of ahah.

[Peter]

I vote yes on the basis of adding value to 'finesse' players and having both shtoi and pptoi

[hong57]

I can live with new categories being added but why remove another stat as a result? If the option was to just add this stat, I'd be open to it but why do we need to remove a category?

One could argue shutouts is somewhat redundant considering we have GAA and SV% that reflects the results of a shutout. So why have GWG? Goals and assists are basic stats but then we have parsed out of that the point stat, which is redundant...plus, we have ST points, which is redundant in the same way shutouts could be redundant for goalies. If the argument of using PPTOI as a way to counter SHTOI, I can understand...but don't eliminate shutouts. If you eliminate a stat to make room, I'd say lose GWG.

valid argument. where were you during this discussion in the suter thread? we could have used some level minded thinkers in there. I would be opposed to losing that stat either but think if you make the argument to keep SO, you have also made it for GWG. It's funny that we have never even discussed adding a stat, only swapping one out.

I mentioned it a while ago..

shows how many of my posts were actually being read...

LOL tbh i read only posts that i can finish within 5 seconds...

[Nick]

From a day or two ago:

Instead of thinking about removing SO, which although it has some support, is a sligthly different convo.
...
....
and IMO we are better off adding another category (which also reduces the impact of goalies, 4/17 instead of 4/16).

[cliff11]

Don't really give a shit

[shooker]

From a day or two ago:

Instead of thinking about removing SO, which although it has some support, is a sligthly different convo.
...
....
and IMO we are better off adding another category (which also reduces the impact of goalies, 4/17 instead of 4/16).

I think goalies are appropriately rated currently and we should avoid reducing that. I think after we took out saves we have the perfect mix right now. A goalie still can win a game or playoff series in real life, we need to protect that ability in bbkl. As of right now it is boarder line. With amazing goaltending you usually only go 3-0-1 in goaltending stats meaning to get the win for the week you still have to have to win at least 5 of the remaining 12 cats to go 8-7-1. I don't think we under value goalies, but we are closer to that then we are over valuing them imo. Most important position in hockey.

[Arian The Insider]

i vote no